Scientific Information System Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal

Sagrario Yárnoz-Yaben Attachment Style and Adjustment to Divorce The Spanish Journal of Psychology, vol. 13, núm. 1, mayo, 2010, pp. 210-219, Universidad Complutense de Madrid España

Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=17213039016

The Spanish Journal of Psychology, ISSN (Printed Version): 1138-7416 [email protected] Universidad Complutense de Madrid España

How to cite Complete issue More information about this article Journal's homepage

www.redalyc.org Non-Profit Academic Project, developed under the Open Acces Initiative The Spanish Journal of Psychology Copyright 2010 by The Spanish Journal of Psychology 2010, Vol. 13 No. 1, 210-219 ISSN 1138-7416

Attachment Style and Adjustment to Divorce

Sagrario Yárnoz-Yaben Universidad del País Vasco (Spain)

Divorce is becoming increasingly widespread in Europe. In this study, I present an analysis of the role played by attachment style (secure, dismissing, preoccupied and fearful, plus the dimensions of anxiety and avoidance) in the adaptation to divorce. Participants comprised divorced parents (N = 40) from a medium- sized city in the Basque Country. The results reveal a lower proportion of people with secure attachment in the sample group of divorcees. Attachment style and dependence (emotional and instrumental) are closely related. I have also found associations between measures that showed a poor adjustment to divorce and the preoccupied and fearful attachment styles. Adjustment is related to a dismissing attachment style and to the avoidance dimension. Multiple regression analysis confirmed that secure attachment and the avoidance dimension predict adjustment to divorce and positive affectivity while preoccupied attachment and the anxiety dimension predicted negative affectivity. Implications for research and interventions with divorcees are discussed. Keywords: adjustment to divorce, attachment style, dependence, positive affectivity, negative affectivity, preoccupation with the ex-spouse.

El divorcio es un fenómeno cada vez más frecuente en Europa. En este estudio, se presenta un análisis del papel jugado por el estilo de apego (seguro, desvalorizador, preocupado y temeroso, más las dos dimensiones de ansiedad y evitación) en la adaptación al divorcio. La muestra está compuesta por progenitores divorciados (N = 40) procedentes de una ciudad de tamaño medio del País Vasco. Los resultados revelan una proporción más baja de personas con un apego seguro en la muestra de progenitores divorciados. El estilo de apego y la dependencia (emocional e instrumental) están estrechamente relacionados. Se encontraron también asociaciones entre medidas que muestran un pobre ajuste al divorcio y los estilos de apego preocupado y temeroso. El ajuste se relaciona con un estilo de apego desvalorizador y la dimensión evitación. Los análisis de regresión múltiple confirman que el apego seguro y la dimensión evitación predicen el ajuste al divorcio y la afectividad positiva, mientras que el estilo de apego preocupado y la dimensión ansiedad predicen la afectividad negativa de los progenitores participantes. Para finalizar, discutimos las implicaciones que estos datos tienen para la investigación y la intervención con progenitores divorciados. Palabras clave: ajuste al divorcio, estilo de apego, dependencia, afectividad positiva, afectividad negativa, preocupación por la ex pareja.

This study is part of a Research Project on Adaptation to Divorce supported by the University of the Basque Country, Grant number GIU07/61. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sagrario Yárnoz-Yaben. Facultad de Psicología. Avda de Tolosa 70. 20018 San Sebastián. (Spain). Phone: +34-943018346. E-mail: [email protected]

210 ATTACHMENT STYLE AND ADJUSTMENT TO DIVORCE 211

The rate of divorce is increasing rapidly in Europe. comfortable with the two main dimensions of attachment, Spain’s increase rate over the last decade for the number i.e. intimacy and autonomy. Preoccupied subjects, on the divorces and separations is 59%, the third highest rate in other hand, have a negative image of themselves and a the EU after Portugal (89%) and Italy (62%), according to positive one of others. This model would correspond with the Eurostat Yearbook (2006-07). Ainsworth et al. (1978)’s “ambivalent” classification. Divorce is usually considered either a process of stress Preoccupied subjects tend to demonstrate dependence (Amato, 2000) or a process of bereavement (Weiss, 1975). and preoccupation in their affective relationships Both these views, which are not mutually exclusive, have (Alonso-Arbiol, Shaver and Yárnoz, 2002). Those with important implications for research and interventions a dismissing attachment style (which correspond to the with divorcees. In this study we focus on adaptation to “avoidant” in the classification of Ainsworth et al., 1978), divorce, considered as a process of bereavement, from have a positive image of themselves and a negative one the perspective of the Attachment Theory, and we analyze of others. They tend to avoid intimacy and deactivate the the emotional regulation strategies used by people with attachment system as a means of defense, with the aim of different attachment styles to adapt to the situation of maintaining their invulnerable and self-sufficient image. divorce. Finally, there are those individuals classified as Fearful, who have a negative image of both themselves and others. Attachment Theory and relationships: attachment Said individuals limit their interpersonal relationships styles in adults because they are afraid of rejection and the subsequent suffering that this may cause. Both dismissing and Attachment Theory is a theory of relationships (Bowlby, fearful individuals tend to avoid intimacy and deactivate 1988). The basic principle underlying this theory is that the their attachment systems, but they do so for different relationship enjoyed by infants with their mother (or main reasons and in different ways (Bartholomew, 1990). attachment figure) during the first years of life conditions Both, each in their own way, share an unsatisfied desire their experience of subsequent relationships, laying the to become involved affectively with others, as well as groundwork for a particular relational style and emotional a susceptibility to depression caused by non gratifying regulation style, which in turn influences both how they interpersonal relationships, fear of rejection and low self- perceive others and how they relate to them during (in confidence. principle) the whole of their life. Various authors (Feeney & Noller, 1996; Hazan & Hazan and Shaver (1987) were the first to conceptualize Shaver, 1987; Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994) have found romantic relationships within the framework of a process an association between the duration and satisfaction of of attachment. They translated the attachment models relationships and attachment style, with the relationships found by Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters and Wall (1978) of secure people being the most long-lasting and satisfying. in children to the dynamics of romantic relationships Furthermore, due to their relational style, which includes between adults and created an instrument that assessed fear of abandonment, the preoccupied persons experience people in accordance with the way in which they related greater distress as a result of the breakup (Simpson, 1990) to their partner. To do so, they described the characteristics and have a greater tendency to become involved again in of each of the models found by Ainsworth et al. (1978) in new relationships. their research (secure, avoidant and anxious-ambivalent) and asked the participants in their study to choose the Divorce and loss model that best described the way they felt about and behaved with their partner. In this way, they demonstrated Confidence in the accessibility of the attachment empirically that the same classification system that is figure when he or she is needed, which protects against used for the evaluation of attachment in infancy can be the intense, chronic fear often felt in response to said successfully used for the evaluation of adult attachment figure’s inaccessibility is built during the development (Hazan and Shaver, 1987). years (infancy, childhood and adolescence) and tends to Subsequently, other authors (Bartholomew, 1990; persist with very few changes throughout an individual’s Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991) have proposed a whole life, reflecting fairly faithfully said individual’s real different way of categorizing attachment models in experiences. The aim of the attachment system is a feeling adults. According to a line of thinking expressed by of security. This feeling of security is the result of the Bowlby, (1979) attachment models reflect the idea assessment and evaluation carried out by each individual that we have of both ourselves and others. Thus, this of a series of internal and external factors (including mood, author distinguishes four relational prototypes, based health or illness, context and specific situations), that may on a positive or negative idea of oneself, and a positive or may not result in the activation of the attachment system. or negative idea of others. Secure subjects, who have Once activated, security is related to the indications of a positive image of both themselves and others, feel accessibly of the attachment figure, while insecurity is 212 YÁRNOZ-YABEN

related to the indications of threats or difficulties in this feelings, which are very similar to bereavement reactions, accessibility (Ainsworth & Bowlby, 1991). include recurrent thoughts and images of the ex-spouse, During childhood, adolescence and adulthood attempts to initiate contact with him/her or find out about difficulties may arise in relation to the attachment figure him/her, and the aforementioned feelings of emptiness, (parent or partner) that may undermine an individual’s loneliness and panic when they realize that this figure is confidence in their accessibility: threats of abandonment now inaccessible. or loss of the attachment figure produce the greatest Based on the classic statement made by Bowlby (1979), distress, both during childhood and at subsequent points that the attachment system remains active in people from of the life cycle. In adults, fear and pain at the loss of the cradle to the grave, over the last twenty years, numerous a partner is mixed with defensive anger. This emotional research studies have been carried out on different aspects cocktail can be observed both in the interaction of of interpersonal relationships and the prototypical way in couples that feel that the other person is inaccessible or which individuals position themselves in relation to others does not respond to their needs (Simpson, Rholes, Oriña in accordance with their attachment style (for example, & Grich, 2002), and in the dynamics of separated or Simpson, 1990). Working with a sample of married people, divorced couples, and is a frequent element of therapy Banse (2004) found a relationship between security of sessions (Todorski, 1995). attachment and marital satisfaction: for both husbands Weiss (1975) found striking similarities between adults and wives, the score obtained for secure attachment immersed in a process of divorce and children separated correlated positively with marital satisfaction, while the from their parents, such as those studied by Bowlby scores obtained for fearful, preoccupied and dismissing (1980a). It is known that emotional reactions play an attachment, correlated negatively with it. important role in the dynamics of individuals (Izard, 2002), Different aspects of the reactions to the loss that follows with ones such as fear, anger and sadness being especially separation or divorce have also been analyzed from this relevant in the area focused on here. When children perspective (Bakermans-Kranenburg & Van IJzendoorn, perceive difficulties regarding access to their attachment 1997; Brown, Felton, Whiteman & Manela, 1980; Davis, figure, fear takes control over other activities and activates Shaver & Vernon, 2003; Finzi, Cohen & Ram, 2000; Pistole, the attachment system, deploying behaviors which 1996; Sbarra & Emery, 2005). Although the majority of normally serve to reestablish access to the attachment researchers associate security of attachment with adequate figure. Fear also serves as a communication signal aimed effective recovery from loss (Bowlby, 1980b; Wayment at the attachment figure him or herself, alerting him/her & Vierthaler, 2002), recently, some authors (Feeney and to the child’s stress and provoking responses designed to Noller, 1996; Fraley & Bonanno, 2004; Fraley & Shaver, comfort them. Anger is a child’s response to a perception 1999) have found that some attachment styles that are of their attachment figures as constantly unavailable. The considered defensive (specifically the avoidant-dismissing role of anger is therefore, on the one hand, to motivate ones) work well in relation to bereavement and loss. the child to overcome the obstacles preventing their being with their attachment figure, and on the other, to The present study communicate their reproach to the attachment figure, with the aim of preventing inaccessibility in the future. Sadness Spain’s increase rate over the last decade for the occurs when the individual internalizes the loss of an number of divorces and separations is 59%, in a country attachment figure, accepting the evidence that said figure where divorce was inexistent before 1981, with a small is not accessible and that any effort expended in an attempt parenthesis in the Second Republic, in 1932, before the to reestablish contact with them is doomed to failure. The devastating civil war of 1936. To our knowledge, this behavioral counterpart of sadness is abandonment, which study is one of the few existing studies that analyze in gives individuals time to accept these unwanted changes a local (Spanish) population the adaptation to divorce of and to review active models (Bowlby, 1980b). parents (see also Yárnoz-Yaben, Guerra, Plazaola, Biurrun Weiss (1975) also found these emotions in people & Comino, 2008), and the only one that highlights the immersed in a process of marital breakup. Those immersed relation between attachment style and adjustment to in a process of divorce often feel a paralyzing fear and divorce in a sample of divorced persons. an intense rage towards the figure they feel is abandoning Based on a review of the studies published on this them (corresponding to the initial protest phase). These theme, we proposed the following hypotheses for our emotions are followed by sadness and an enormous sense research project: of loneliness, which correspond to the final phase of ––H1. Various authors (Feeney & Noller, 1996; Hazan despair, in which the world is perceived as empty, desolate & Shaver, 1987; Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994) have and dead. found an association between the duration and Weiss (1976) used the term “separation distress” to satisfaction of relationships and attachment style. refer to the feelings experienced by many separated people We therefore expect to find a lower proportion with regard to their ex-spouse. The manifestation of these of secure attachment in our sample of divorcees. ATTACHMENT STYLE AND ADJUSTMENT TO DIVORCE 213

Furthermore, we expect that preoccupied and seven-point scale, the degree to which respondents see fearfully attached persons will experience greater themselves reflected in the prototypes of four attachment distress than secure and dismissing persons as a styles: secure, preoccupied, fearful and dismissing. It also result of the breakup. offers the possibility of obtaining two dimensions: anxiety ––H2: Relationships will be found between dependence and avoidance, which underlie the self-report instruments and attachment style. Previous research has shown which assess attachment in adults (Griffin & Bartholomew, that dependence, both instrumental and emotional, 1994). correlates with attachment style (Alonso-Arbiol et al., 2002). In this study, we expect to find similar Adjustment to divorce and preoccupation with the ex- patterns of association between dependence spouse and attachment among divorcees. That is to say It was assessed with eight questions (Kitson, that a high level of instrumental and emotional 1982; Spanish version Yárnoz-Yaben, 2004) to witch dependence will be correlated with preoccupied participants respond on a three-point scale. Four of them attachment and the anxiety dimension. reflect habitual concerns following a divorce, such as, for ––H3. Attachment style (secure and dismissing example, whether the divorce was a good (or bad) idea attachment) and the corresponding dimension (alpha .77) and the other four reflect preoccupation with of avoidance will predict a better adjustment to the ex-spouse (alpha .78), that is commonly used as an divorce and positive affect. index of poor adjustment to divorce: behaviors such as ––H4. Attachment style (preoccupied and fearful thinking about the ex-spouse a lot, wondering what he/she attachment) and the corresponding dimension is doing, etc., reflect a poor adaptation to divorce. of anxiety will predict preoccupation with the ex spouse and negative affect. Psychological well-being As a measure of psychological well-being we used the Method Bradburn’s Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PNA, Warr, Barter & Brown-Bridge, 1983; Spanish translation Vergara, Participants Yárnoz & Páez, 1988). This instrument, composed of 18 Participants comprised 40 divorcees, 18 men and 22 items, rates the respondent’s emotional state (positive: women. 21 belonged to an association of separated parents feelings of joy, interest, contentment, or negative; feelings and 19 were contacted through an FMP (Family Meeting of sadness, fear, and restlessness) on a scale of 1 to 4 Point), where parents pick up or drop off their children by (1 = totally disagree, 4 = totally agree). Negative affect court order in the case of conflictive divorces. The age of is related to interpersonal problems, neuroticism and participants ranged from 22 to 68 (M = 45.5, SD = 10.1), anxiety. Positive affect is related to social contacts and they had between one and three children (M = 1.7), had extraversion (Warr, et al., 1983). In the Spanish adaptation, been married for a mean of 13.2 years (SD = 7.7) and had alphas ranged from .76 for the positive affect to .71 for the been separated or divorced for between three months and negative affect (Vergara, Yárnoz & Páez, 1989). 18 years (M = 5.4, SD = 5.1). 30% had received a secondary education only, 45% had mid-level studies and 25% had Dependence university degrees. 35% now live with another person Dependence was assessed using the IDI (Interpersonal following their divorce and 65% live alone. Participation Dependency Inventory; Hirschfeld et al, 1977). This in the study was voluntary. Participants completed a scale distinguishes between Emotional Dependence (ER) battery of tests containing the self-reports described below. and Instrumental Dependence (LS) and consists of 16 questions in the ER subscale and 13 questions in the LS Measures subscale, which respondents answer on a four-point scale. In the Spanish adaptation of the IDI, alphas ranged from Demographic factors, initiative and attitudes to divorce .73 for Instrumental Dependence to .84 for the Emotional A series of questions were asked regarding the length Dependence (Alonso-Arbiol, Shaver & Yárnoz, 2002). of time for which they had been married and divorced, number of children, income level, attitudes to divorce Results and whether or not they took the initiative in the divorce proceedings. Descriptive Statistics

Attachment Style Relationship style measures We used a Spanish version (Yárnoz-Yaben, 2008) Type of Attachment. Participants were identified as of the RQ, Relationship Questionnaire, (Bartholomew categorically secure (secure vs. not secure) if the maximum and Horowitz, 1991). This instrument assesses, on a score of the four items that assessed attachment was in the 214 YÁRNOZ-YABEN

item that reflected security or if the maximum score of the Adjustment to divorce four items reflected a tie between one secure item and one The mean obtained in the scale of adjustment to divorce insecure one (Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994). Otherwise, was 9.42 (SD = 1.82), and the mean for preoccupation with they were classified as insecure. In our sample, 21 people the ex-spouse was 4.82 (SD = 1.17). The mean obtained (52.5%) were classified as secure and 18 (45%) as insecure for positive affectivity was 22.52 (SD = 5.70) and the (the data corresponding to one person were lost). mean for negative affectivity was 16.70 (SD = 5.95). Continuous measures and dimensions of attachment. Associations between Demographic variables, Dependence, Initiative, Adjustment. and Attachment Style In this study, we used continuous and dimensional As a preliminary analysis, we assessed the influence measures of attachment, rather than the categorical ones of gender in the adjustment, dependence and attachment described in the previous section. The mean values found measures. The Pearson chi-square did not prove significant for each attachment style were as follows: secure 4.70 in any of the tests carried out, and as a result, we conducted (SD = 2.02), dismissing 4.35 (SD = 1.79), preoccupied the analysis jointly for men and women. 3.83 (SD = 2.08), and fearful 3.35 (SD = 1.96). The mean The correlations among the variables used in this study for the dimensional measure of anxiety was 7.17 (SD = 3.60) are reflected in table 1. and the mean for avoidance was 9.05 (SD = 3.24). I have found no significant associations between demographic variables and measures of adjustment Initiative in the divorce or preoccupation with the ex-spouse. Instrumental 13 participants (32 %) said that it was their ex-spouse dependence correlated with preoccupied attachment and who took the initiative in filing for divorce, 5 (12%) said the anxiety dimension. Emotional dependence is closely that both partners took the initiative and 22 (55%) said that correlated with preoccupied and fearful attachment and they themselves took the initiative. with the anxiety dimension. These data reinforce the

Table 1 Correlations between demographic variables, dependency, initiative, preoccupation, adjustment and attachment measures

N = 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1. Secure attach. 1

2. Dismissing att. .44* 1

3. Preoccupied att. -.20 -.15 1

4. Fearful att. -.10 -.04 .58** 1

5. Anxiety -.17 -.11 .89** .88** 1

6. Avoidance .87** .83** -.21 -.09 -.17 1

7. Years married .04 .03 .01 .33* .19 .04 1

8. Number of childr. .32* .20 .05 .18 .13 .30 .51** 1

9. Instrument. Dep. -.27 -.13 .48** .21 .40* -.30 .13 .08 1

10. Emotional Dep. -.16 -.23 .66** .54** .68** -17 -.04 -.04 .62** 1

11. Initiative in div. -.05 .01 .05 -.04 .00 .02 -.20 .19 -.01 -.05 1

12. Preocup. Ex .03 .30 .44* .22 .30 .18 .15 .15 .21 .24 .16 1

13. Adjustment .44** .34* .08 .04 .02 .47** -.06 .23 -.16 -.14 .26 .13 1

14. Positive Affect. .47** .24 -.28 -.17 -.26 .43** -.27 .01 -.39* -.19 .11 -.18 .35* 1 15. Negative Affect. -.18 -.30 .51** .30 .46** -.28 .04 -.25 .20 .37* -.14 .07 -.27 -.20

Note. * p < .05; ** p < .01 ATTACHMENT STYLE AND ADJUSTMENT TO DIVORCE 215 relational patterns between attachment and dependence The corrected R² for the analysis of these variables with found in previous research (Alonso-Arbiol et al., 2002). self-perceived adjustment as the dependent variable was Adjustment correlated with secure and dismissing .176 (F (1, 39) = 9.34, p = .004). The only variable that attachment, the avoidance dimension and positive entered into the equation was secure attachment. Given affectivity. This confirms both the hypothesis that their low partial correlation value, which failed to increase associates security of attachment with a good adjustment significantly the value of the coefficient of determination, to loss, and that which defends the good working of the remaining variables were not included in the equation. dismissing attachment styles. When I introduced the same variables into the regression, Preoccupation with the ex-spouse was found to be but using the dimensional attachment style measure associated with a preoccupied attachment style, and fearful (anxiety and avoidance) instead of the continuous measure, attachment style to the length of marriage. the corrected R² for the analysis of these variables with Note that there are not significant correlations between self-perceived adjustment as the dependent variable was initiative in filing for divorce and measures of adjustment, .195 (F (1, 39) = 10.45, p = .003). The beta coefficients dependence, or attachment style. for avoidance were statistically significant (.46, p = .003), although this was not true for anxiety. This means that Adjustment to Divorce, Attachment Style and Dependence the avoidance dimension and the secure attachment style The final step in this study was to determine, using a explained part of the self-perceived adjustment (19.5% linear regression analysis (Berry, 1993) the role played by and 17.6% of the variance, respectively). attachment style and dependence in predicting adjustment The analysis of the attachment and dependence to divorce (positive and negative affectivity and self- variables with positive affectivity gave an corrected R² = perceived adjustment). We performed hierarchical .205 (F (1, 39) = 11.08, p = .002). The beta coefficients regressions analysis by the method stepwise using the for security were statistically significant, (.47, p = .002), SSPS 16 program. not for the other attachment styles or for dependence. In the first of these analyses, the objective was to When we repeated the regression using the dimensional determine the role played by attachment style (secure, attachment style measure, the corrected R² for the analysis dismissing, preoccupied and fearful) and dependence of these variables with positive affectivity was .163 (F (1, (instrumental and emotional) in adjustment to divorce. 39) = 8.61, p = .006). The beta coefficients for avoidance These data are shown in table 2. were statistically significant (.43, p = .006).

Table 2 Regression analysis of variables predicting adjustment to divorce and positive affectivity

Variable B SE B β

Predicting adjustment with attachment style (N = 40)a Step 1 Secure Attachment Style .40 .13 .44*** Predicting adjustment with attachment dimensions (N = 40)b

Step 1 Avoidance .26 .08 .46*** Predicting positive affectivity with attachment style (N = 40)c

Step 1 Secure Attachment Style .47*** 1.34 .40 Predicting positive affectivity with attachment dimensions (N = 40)d

Step 1 Avoidance .76 .26 .43**

Note. a corrected R² = . 176; b corrected R² = .195; c corrected R² = .205 d corrected R² = .163 **p < .01, ***p < .005. 216 YÁRNOZ-YABEN

This means that, at least in the present sample, secure In our sample, 21 people (52.5%) were classified as attachment and the avoidance dimension explain part of secure and 18 (45%) as insecure. The percentage of secure the adjustment to divorce, both from the point of view of people is lower than both the 72% found in Germany (Banse participants’ own perspective (self-perceived adjustment) 2004) in a population of married couples, and the 61.4% and from that of positive affectivity. According to these found in a representative sample of married or cohabiting data, dependence (instrumental or emotional) does not couples in the USA (Mickelson, Kessler, & Shaver, 1997). seem to play a relevant role in adaptation to divorce. This confirms that in our sample of divorced people, the In the regression analysis of the continuous variables of secure attachment type is underrepresented. attachment and dependence with preoccupation for the ex- The association found between fearful attachment and a spouse as the dependent variable, no variable was found longer duration of the marriage was unexpected. Previous to have a significance level. Similar results were obtained studies (Bartholomew, 1990; Griffin & Bartholomew, regarding the dimensional measures of attachment 1994) affirm that avoidant-fearful people organize their and dependence. Regarding negative affectivity and behavior defensively, in order to minimize the suffering continuous measures of attachment and dependence, one caused by being rejected by others, an occurrence they fear single variable, i.e. the preoccupied attachment style due to their negative idea of themselves and their positive (beta coefficients of .51, p = 001) explained 24.2% of the idea of others. They therefore try to reduce their emotional variance (corrected R² = .242 (F (1, 39) = 13.48, p = .001). involvement with others, perhaps in an attempt to control When the regression was carried out using dimensional the emotional dependence with which this attachment style measures of attachment and dependence as independent is associated, and which is reflected in our data. Remaining variables, anxiety about relationships (corrected R² = .190 in a marriage that, in the end, proved unsuccessful (hence (F (1, 39) = 10.16, p = .003) was the only variable with the divorce), is a good example of this way of acting. significant beta coefficients (.46,p = .003). These data are The preoccupied attachment style is associated with reflected in table 3. instrumental and emotional dependence, preoccupation In short, as we supposed, attachment styles, specifically with the ex-spouse and negative affectivity (or lack the avoidance dimension and the secure attachment style, of positive affectivity). It is not surprising that in the are powerful predictors when assessing adaptation to regression analysis, negative affectivity is explained by divorce and positive affectivity. The other side of the coin, the preoccupied attachment style. Previous studies have i.e. negative affectivity is explained by the preoccupied demonstrated that people with a preoccupied attachment attachment style and anxiety about relationships. style are those who encounter the most difficulties when adapting to a situation of divorce or loss (Davis et al., 2003; Fraley & Bonanno, 2004). Discussion The strategy employed by avoidant-dismissing persons, on the other hand, is centered on self-sufficiency The objective of this study was to analyze the and independence. They avoid opening up to others and adaptation to divorce as a process of bereavement from depending on them (although according to our data, this the perspective of attachment theory. On the one hand, association is only significant for instrumental dependence, we tested the association between attachment measures, note that the correlation with emotional dependence, dependence, initiative in filing for divorce and adjustment; despite not being significant, is nevertheless negative); and on the other, we analyzed the role played by the but this is because, at a conscious level, they see little aforementioned variables in adjustment to divorce. use in forging emotional ties with others or depending on

Table 3 Regression analysis of variables predicting negative affectivity

Variable B SE B β Predicting negative affectivity with attachment style (N = 40)a Step 1 Preoccupied Attachment Style 1.46 .40 . 51*** Predicting negative affectivity with attachment dimensions (N = 40)b Step 1 Anxiety .76 .24 .46*** Note. a corrected R² = .242; b corrected R² = .190 ***p < .005 ATTACHMENT STYLE AND ADJUSTMENT TO DIVORCE 217 others, not because they are afraid of being hurt. In fact, differences in attachment style impact affect regulation, and according to our data, the dismissing attachment style information processing, and communication in close correlates with self-perceived adjustment to divorce. relationships. Therapeutic or preventive interventions Griffin and Bartholomew (1994) believe that there are with divorced or separated parents should bear in mind two underlying dimensions to the attachment prototypes: these differences that strongly affect the emotional and attachment-related anxiety and avoidance. The first behavioral processes involved in separation and divorce. dimension refers to the degree to which people are alert Persons with a preoccupied attachment style are those to issues related to attachment and relationships. A high who encounter the most difficulties when adapting to a degree of anxiety is, for example, related to concern that situation of divorce or loss. But because of the features of the attachment figure may not be available when needed, their relational style, and their tendency to hyperactivate while a less anxious person feels relatively secure about their attachment system in case of stress or danger, they issues related to attachment. In our study, the dimension are alert to issues related to attachment and relationships, of anxiety is related to dependence (both instrumental and they value and appreciate an eventual therapist’s help. and emotional), preoccupation with the ex-spouse and On the other hand, the dismissing attachment style is negative affectivity, and was found to play a key role in a associated with better adjustment to divorce, low levels of poor adaptation to divorce through negative affectivity. In dependency and positive affectivity. Avoidant-dismissing this sense, our data coincide with those of Davis, Shaver persons tend to deactivate their attachment system when & Vernon (2003). distressed or needy; centered on self-sufficiency and The second dimension, avoidance, refers to individual independence, they feel uncomfortable opening up to differences in the tendency to use avoidant strategies (as others. They will not seek help, and if they do, they may opposed to contact-seeking strategies) in order to regulate ‘dismiss’ what therapy has to offer. interpersonal relationships. People at the highest end The results and implications of this study may have of this scale tend to withdraw their interest in personal been very different if analyzed in a divorce-sample without relationships, while those at the lower end feel comfortable children. When divorce occurs and there are children, an opening up to others and using them as a secure base. Our ex-spouse is a co-parent for life. In this context, parental data associate this dimension negatively with instrumental attachment style seems to influence not only parental dependence (although not statistically significant, adaptation to divorce but also family ties after divorce, probably due to the size of the sample), as well as with which in turn, have long-term implications for children a good level of self-perceived adjustment to divorce. It (Sobolewski & Amato, 2007). In fact, over the last years, is also associated with positive affectivity (and inversely, several methods of intervention with divorced parents with negative affectivity). Furthermore, we found that this have been developed, with the objective of reducing the dimension plays an important role in adaptation to divorce experience of negative emotions, like anger, grief, guilt, (both as regards self-perceived adjustment and positive revenge and vulnerability, common in loss processes, affectivity). which bolster interparental conflict and undermine the Our data regarding adaptation to loss in divorced people possibility of responsible coparenting (Bernstein, 2007). therefore coincide with those found by Fraley, Davis, & Some of them are based on attachment-theory and Shaver (1998), Fraley & Shaver (1999) and Fraley & research (Beckerman & Sarracco, 2002), and take into Bonanno (2004), who argue that avoidant strategies of consideration contributions like the one discussed here emotional regulation may be as effective as proximity- and other clinical implications of attachment theory, like seeking strategies when regulating bereavement processes the idea of the therapist as a secure base and the nature of and the discomfort caused by interpersonal relationships. therapeutic change (Yárnoz, Plazaola & Etxeberria, 2008); the effects on infant attachment to mother and to father of Implications for intervention and research and limitations the increasingly common practice of overnight visitation of this study (Kelly, 2007) and the connection of attachment with other constructs that are supposed to facilitate the adaptation to The findings of this study demonstrate the relations divorce, as forgiveness (Yárnoz-Yaben, 2009). between attachment style and adjustment to divorce. There are also some implications for research. For This is coherent with previous studies that establish the instance, how can the parental alliance following divorce influence of attachment style in emotional regulation, in be tailored having in mind the characteristics and resources the response to stressful situations like divorce, and its of a given family, parental attachment and adjustment relations with coping and mental health (Davis et al., 2003; capacity included? We are also in need for an instrument Vareschi & Bursik, 2005), and has powerful implications to evaluate and help us to understand the psychological for therapeutic and preventive interventions with divorced impact of divorce in a family group from the perspective of or separated parents. According to them, individual attachment theory, especially in the divorce court contest. 218 YÁRNOZ-YABEN

We are well aware of several limitations of our study. Brown, P., Felton, B. J., Whiteman, V. & Manela, R. (1980). First, because of the cross-sectional design of this study, Attachment and distress following marital separation. we are unable to draw any conclusions with regard to Journal of Divorce, 3, 303-317. possible causal relationships between the variables we Davis, D., Shaver, P. R. & Vernon, M. L. (2003). Physical, used. Second, ours is a convenience and small sample, and Emotional, and Behavioral Reactions to Breaking up: it is not representative of the general population from which The Roles of Gender, Age, Emotional Involvement, and it was drawn. Third, self-report measures have been used Attachment Style. Personality and Social Psychology to evaluate all the constructs in this study. Particularly in Bulletin, 29, 871-884. the case of the attachment evaluation, it would have been Eurostat Yearbook 2006-07. Available on-line in http://epp. useful to include other measures of the same construct, as eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ for example, interview measures of adult attachment style. Feeney, J. & Noller, P. (1996). Adult Attachment. London: Sage. Further research will address those issues. Finzi, R., Cohen, O. & Ram, A. (2000). Attachment and Divorce. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 11, 1-20. Fraley, R. C. & Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Attachment and Loss: References A Test of Three Competing Models on the Association Between Attachment-Related Avoidance and Adaptation to Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An Ethological Bereavement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, approach to Personality Development. American 30, 878-890. Psychologist, 46, 333-341. Fraley, R. C. & Shaver, P. R. (1999). Loss and bereavement: Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Attachment theory and recent controversies concerning Patterns of Attachment. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum. “grief work” and the nature of detachment. In J. Cassidy&P. Alonso-Arbiol, I., Shaver, P. & Yárnoz, S. (2002). Insecure R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, attachment, gender roles, and interpersonal dependency in and clinical applications (pp. 735-759). New York: Guilford. the Basque Country. Personal Relationships, 9, 479-490. Fraley, R. C., Davis, K. E. & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Dismissing- Amato, P. (2000). The consequences of divorce for adults and avoidance and the defensive organization of emotion, cognition, and behavior. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1269-1287. (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 249- Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. & VanIJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). 279). New York: Guilford. Adult attachment and the break-up of romantic relationships. Griffin, D. W. & Bartholomew, K. (1994). The metaphysics Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 27, 121-139. of measurement: The case of adult attachment. In K. Banse, R. (2004). Adult attachment and marital satisfaction: Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in personal Evidence for dyadic configuration effects. Journal of Social relationships: Vol. 5. Attachment processes in adulthood (pp. and Personal Relationships, 21(2), 273–282. 17-52). London: Jessica Kingsley. Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, as an Attachment Process. Journal of Personality and Social 147-178. Psychology, 52, 511-524. Bartholomew, K. & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles Hirschfeld, R. M., Klerman, G. L., Gough, H. G., Barret, among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal J., Korchin, S. J., & Chodoff, P. (1977). A measure of of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244. interpersonal dependency. Journal of Personality Assessment, Beckerman, N., & Sarracco, M. (2002). Intervening with couples 41, 610-618. in relationship conflict: integrating emotionally focused Izard, C.E. (2002). Translating emotion theory and research into couple therapy and attachment theory. Family Therapy, 29, preventative interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 796- 23-31. 824. Kelly., J. B. (2007). Children’s Living Arrangements Following Berry, W.D. (1993). Understanding regression assumptions. Separation and Divorce: Insights From Empirical and London: Sage Clinical Research. Family Process, 46, 35-52. Bernstein, A. C. (2007). Re-visioning, restructuring, and Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Davis, K. E. (1994). Attachment style, reconciliation: clinical practice with complex postdivorce gender and relationship stability: A longitudinal analysis. families. Family Process, 46, 67–78. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66, 502-512. Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. Kitson, G. C. (1982). Attachment to the spouse in divorce: A London: Tavistock. scale and its application. Journal of Marriage and the Family, Bowlby, J. (1980a). Attachment and Loss. vol II. Separation. 44, 379-393. New York: Basic Books. Mickelson, K. D., Kessler, R. C. & Shaver, P. R. (1997). Adult Bowlby, J. (1980b). Attachment and Loss. vol III. Loss, sadness attachment in a nationally representative sample. Journal of and depression. New York: Basic Books. Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1092–1106. Bowlby, J. (1988). Developmental psychiatry comes of age. Pistole, M. C. (1996). After love: Attachment styles and grief American Journal of Psychiatry, 145, 1-10. themes. Family Journal, 4, 199-207. ATTACHMENT STYLE AND ADJUSTMENT TO DIVORCE 219

Sbarra, D. A. & Emery, R. E. (2005). The emotional sequelae of Weiss, R. S. (1975). Marital separation. New York: Basic Books. nonmarital relationship dissolution: Analysis of change and Weiss, R. S. (1976). The emotional impact of marital separation. intraindividual variability over time. Personal Relationships, Journal of Social Issues, 32, 135-145. 12, 213-232. Yárnoz-Yaben, S. (2004). Ajuste autopercibido al divorcio y Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic preocupación por la ex pareja (Self-perceived adjustment and relationships. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, preoccupation with the ex spouse). Unpublished manuscript. 59, 971-980. University of the Basque Country. Saint Sebastian. Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., Oriña, M. M., & Grich, J. (2002). Yárnoz-Yaben, S. (2008). La Evaluación desde la Teoría del Working Models of Attachment, Support Giving, and Apego: el lugar de los autoinformes y otros instrumentos Support Seeking in a Stressful Situation. Personality and en la evaluación del apego en niños, adolescentes y adultos Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 598-608. [Assessment from the Attachment Theory: the place of self- Sobolewski, J. M., & Amato, P. R. (2007). Parents’ discord and reports and other instruments when assessing attachment in divorce, parent-child relationships and subjective well-being: children, adolescents and adults]. In S. Yárnoz-Yaben (ed.) Is feeling close to two parents always better than feeling La Teoría del Apego en la Clínica I: Evaluación y clínica close to one? Social Forces, 85, 1105-1124. (Attachment Theory and the clinical practice, I) pp. 95-162. Todorski, J. (1995). Attachment and Divorce: A therapeutic view. Madrid: Psimática. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 22, 189-205. Yárnoz-Yaben, S. (2009). Forgiveness, Attachment, and Divorce. Vareschi, C. G., & Bursik, K. (2005). Attachment style differences Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 50, 282-294. in the parental interactions and adaptation patterns of divorcing Yárnoz-Yaben, S., Guerra, J., Plazaola, M., Biurrun, J., y parents. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 42, 15-32. Comino, P. (2008). Características demográficas, actitudes Vergara, A., Yárnoz, S. y Páez, D. (1989). Escala de afectividad y dependencia en la adaptación al divorcio (Demographics, positiva y negativa (PNA) o de bienestar/malestar attitudes and dependence in the adjustment to divorce). subjetivo de Bradburn (PNA, Bradburn´s Positive and Ansiedad y Estrés, 14, 43-53. Negative Affectivity Scale). In A. Echevarría & D. Páez Yarnoz-Yaben, S, Plazaola, M & Etxeberria, J. (2008). (eds), Emociones: perspectivas psicosociales (Emotions: Adaptation to divorce: An attachment-based intervention Psychosocial perspectives). (pp.477-479). Madrid: Fundamentos. with long-term divorced parents. Journal of Divorce & Warr, P., Barter, J. & Brown-Bridge, G., (1983). On the Remarriage, 49, 291-307. independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 644-651. Wayment, H. A. & Vierthaler, J. (2002). Attachment style Received October 24, 2008 and bereavement reaction. Journal of Loss and Trauma, Revision received May 27, 2009 7, 129-149. Accepted June 15, 2009